Hitchcock to Torts would be a parallel move. We need a coach who encourages an offensive approach. Our D is strong enough to pick up the slack. I would not be against Vigneault if they were to make a coaching change, which is something obviously not on the horizon. Plus, Vig will be the next coach of the Rags, mark it down.

We're talking about firing Hitch who brought in a top drawer D system because the front office has been too cheap to hire elite forwards to hire Torts who had elite forwards up the wazoo, a top drawer goalie and D corps with the result of getting blown out?

Word is the Rags are considering Messier. Oh please, make it so. He'd be a disaster as a head coach. Nostalgic decisions don't necessarily lead to championship caliber teams, and frankly I'd love to see the Rags miss the playoffs a few seasons in a row. If nothing else, it would ensure Hank Lundqvist decides to test the free agent waters and maybe Army can snag him up on a sweet deal.

What's funny is, if he was available, I truly believe we'd try and sign him, considering we have a half dozen netminders already (didn't we just sign two more in the last month or two?) and really just. need. offense. Seriously. Scorer. Sign. A scorer. Please.

Messier hasn't paid his dues as a coach. Much as I don't like Roy's personal temperment, he paid his dues and showed he can coach success at the lower levels, so giving him a shot in Colorado is worth it; he earned it.

Messier...yeah, that's a disaster. Rangers need to sign him before they give it a second thought

While I'd love them to get a scorer, obviously, the bottom line is Lundqvist can and will steal games. That's more than we can say for Halak or Elliott. I'd be all about signing Lundqvist and hoping guys like Jaskin, Rattie, Tarasenko and Schwartz can provide the offense needed to compete in the postseason.

While I'd love them to get a scorer, obviously, the bottom line is Lundqvist can and will steal games. That's more than we can say for Halak or Elliott. I'd be all about signing Lundqvist and hoping guys like Jaskin, Rattie, Tarasenko and Schwartz can provide the offense needed to compete in the postseason.

My main concern is that historically we've been the team that elite netminders come to before they 'die'; Hall, Fuhr, Legace and it looks like Halak may be next (Much as I am so not a big Halak fan, I would LOVE to see him pull out an epic comeback). Signing Henry after the way the Rangers lost would be a major concern to me (That team has NO excuse to have lost). Plus he's 31, how do we know he's not at the start of a decline?

Not that I disagree with your rationale, but Elliott stood on his head against LA and we couldn't win games we would have won if we had one or two elite offensive players. We could put Dominik Hasek or Patrick Roy in their prime between the pipes and still lose by a goal as we stand. It just illustrates more and more our big problem. Sure, we can hope Rattie, Tank, etc. provide the offense, but we've been doing that since Checketts introduced the 5-year plan almost what, 8 years ago? We need elite scorers and we're not going to develop those, those we will have to pay for.

While I'd love them to get a scorer, obviously, the bottom line is Lundqvist can and will steal games. That's more than we can say for Halak or Elliott. I'd be all about signing Lundqvist and hoping guys like Jaskin, Rattie, Tarasenko and Schwartz can provide the offense needed to compete in the postseason.

My main concern is that historically we've been the team that elite netminders come to before they 'die'; Hall, Fuhr, Legace and it looks like Halak may be next (Much as I am so not a big Halak fan, I would LOVE to see him pull out an epic comeback). Signing Henry after the way the Rangers lost would be a major concern to me (That team has NO excuse to have lost). Plus he's 31, how do we know he's not at the start of a decline?

Not that I disagree with your rationale, but Elliott stood on his head against LA and we couldn't win games we would have won if we had one or two elite offensive players. We could put Dominik Hasek or Patrick Roy in their prime between the pipes and still lose by a goal as we stand. It just illustrates more and more our big problem. Sure, we can hope Rattie, Tank, etc. provide the offense, but we've been doing that since Checketts introduced the 5-year plan almost what, 8 years ago? We need elite scorers and we're not going to develop those, those we will have to pay for.

Look at the great players in the NHL. All drafted by their current teams for example: Crosby, Stamkos, Ovechkin, Giroux, Toews, Datsyuk, Malkin.....Teams won't trade or let these guys go.

While I'd love them to get a scorer, obviously, the bottom line is Lundqvist can and will steal games. That's more than we can say for Halak or Elliott. I'd be all about signing Lundqvist and hoping guys like Jaskin, Rattie, Tarasenko and Schwartz can provide the offense needed to compete in the postseason.

My main concern is that historically we've been the team that elite netminders come to before they 'die'; Hall, Fuhr, Legace and it looks like Halak may be next (Much as I am so not a big Halak fan, I would LOVE to see him pull out an epic comeback). Signing Henry after the way the Rangers lost would be a major concern to me (That team has NO excuse to have lost). Plus he's 31, how do we know he's not at the start of a decline?

Not that I disagree with your rationale, but Elliott stood on his head against LA and we couldn't win games we would have won if we had one or two elite offensive players. We could put Dominik Hasek or Patrick Roy in their prime between the pipes and still lose by a goal as we stand. It just illustrates more and more our big problem. Sure, we can hope Rattie, Tank, etc. provide the offense, but we've been doing that since Checketts introduced the 5-year plan almost what, 8 years ago? We need elite scorers and we're not going to develop those, those we will have to pay for.

Look at the great players in the NHL. All drafted by their current teams for example: Crosby, Stamkos, Ovechkin, Giroux, Toews, Datsyuk, Malkin.....Teams won't trade or let these guys go.

One thing that no one is taking into account is that everyone was watching the playoffs. The Blues team they saw would have going the distance if they had one elite scorer. There are players watching that are looking for a team that can take them to the Cup and those that are forwards are paying close attention to us, those forwards with the skills who want the best chance to win. Yes, you could sign with Detroit, Chicago, etc. but how much more legendary would you be if you played for a team that was winning their first Cup? Look at LA, no matter where he goes or what he does from here, the name Jonathan Quick is legendary and will be remembered forever, no matter how many more Cups they win. He and that team were the first and being the first at something like that is what builds statues, gets streets named after them and become a part of mythology.

I am of the belief that we won't need to look for those elite players, they will come to us. And for those who think that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever said, just remember this: that's how Jay Bo came to us.

Who's to say if we actually had an "elite" scorer, he'd actually score? Let's take the Rangers as an example. They had Gaborik, have Nash, have Richards, Callahan could probably pot a bunch of goals and so, I think, could Hagelin. But in Torts system, they couldn't do shit because he was defense, defense, defense. Shot blocking, sacrifice the body, and the goal scorers were stifled. Hitchcock runs a similar system, minus the sideshow pressers. How do you know we won't go out and trade for Crosby, Stamkos and Tavares and the three of them turn into defensive phenoms who can't score more than 15 goals apiece? We're better off, if Hitch stays on, to have as many guys as possible who can score 15-20 goals a season than stay basically as is, add an expensive goalscorer and watch his numbers plummet because he's playing a defense first system. What this team really needs is a leader who won't allow them to play 2 good periods and 1 lousy one, or take off the last 2 minutes of each period. How many games did we see them lose because they couldn't put together a full 60 minutes?

Who's to say if we actually had an "elite" scorer, he'd actually score? Let's take the Rangers as an example. They had Gaborik, have Nash, have Richards, Callahan could probably pot a bunch of goals and so, I think, could Hagelin. But in Torts system, they couldn't do shit because he was defense, defense, defense. Shot blocking, sacrifice the body, and the goal scorers were stifled. Hitchcock runs a similar system, minus the sideshow pressers. How do you know we won't go out and trade for Crosby, Stamkos and Tavares and the three of them turn into defensive phenoms who can't score more than 15 goals apiece? We're better off, if Hitch stays on, to have as many guys as possible who can score 15-20 goals a season than stay basically as is, add an expensive goalscorer and watch his numbers plummet because he's playing a defense first system. What this team really needs is a leader who won't allow them to play 2 good periods and 1 lousy one, or take off the last 2 minutes of each period. How many games did we see them lose because they couldn't put together a full 60 minutes?

1. Torts is to the Rangers what Mike Keenan was to us. If I had a coach like that, I'd demand to be traded. Guy's a jerk and his coaching has led to disaster from a Rangers team that should be a perennial threat for the Cup.

2. The problem we have is that there is no clear-cut 'job' people. Even our best D is being relied on to score goals as well, where it should be the forwards carrying that weight. Our brightest days came from when we have those people; Oates assisted, Hull scored, etc. One of the big exceptions was Al, who was so awesome he scored and played D because he's Al. The people you listed are not known as deep D people, they score. Sure they can play some D, but they're forwards, they're paid to score, so....they score. No rocket science there.

I totally agree with the sentiment that if we signed an elite forward that they would get sucked into the d first system and suck. For all we know, Stewart, Perron and Backes would be loading up the net if they had a different or hybrid system given to them, which if this is true means if we want real success at the next level, there's really one option we should consider: Fire Hitchcock.

But

If you look at it that way, also consider this: Hitch had Modano and Hull and won a Cup. Two of Dallas' elite forwards at that time. We don't have one elite forward. I'm of the mind to give Hitch that and if he can't make it work with what he has, then fire him. But give him the chance. He's shown his system works and works wonderfully IF he has what he needs. And it's apparent there's a missing link here and we all know that's remedied with a signing or two of elite forwards. So dump what we can't work for us in this system and sign what will so we can finally win.

Oh I have no doubt that if Perron and Stewart were playing in a different system they'd score with incredible consistency. Backes maybe Backes, he's proven he can score on this team and just had an off year. The difference is Backes is a guy who will crash the net and score the shit goals, kind of like Walt. Stewart is a pansy and Perron is a figure skating douche who will score some highlight reel goals but not with the frequency we need him to, AND not get back on defense when necessary. The best thing for both of them (Perron and Stewart) is to play somewhere else. Or, get a new coach with a hybrid style, as you mention, and watch them light up the scoreboard nightly. We have the personnel to score goals, but we don't have the system to score goals, so it's either stick with Hitch and win low scoring games with regularity, or sack Hitch and hope his replacement puts in a viable system that we can score, not give up too many goals and win games when we need to win games. I just think adding anyone who's supposed to be a pure scorer will not help this team one bit. He'll cost too much in terms of money and/or prospects, prevent the team from re-signing the players who need to be re-signed (Pie, Shatty) and set this team back. Again, we have the personnel, we just don't have the system. The way they're situated now, I just see more of the same. Good regular season, short visit to the playoffs, excessively long off-season. Adding a prolific goalscorer won't change that.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum